Common Man on “My Mantra Going Forward”

guest-commentaryAnd so we arrive on Guest Commentary night. Another Friday has come so quickly. An interesting week so far I must say. We have had debates on the bias of my little site. We have discussed hypocritical Democrats and Hypocritical Republicans. We have set ourselves up for some learning and introspection that will be coming to us shortly. I have asked for more guest commentary pieces for submission. And you, my dear readers, have responded with a slew of them, which pleases me more than I can put into words. The differing opinions and discussions that come from them are refreshing and rewarding for all those who frequent Stand Up For America…

Tonight’s guest post actually does a really good job of following up the “March Towards Socialism” series that we recently completed. Submitting for your digestion this evening is none other than recent addition to our discussions Common Man. As I do every week, I point out that guest commentaries are the opinions of those submitting them, not me. I am merely the person writing an intro and giving them a forum to use their voice. Without further delay, tonight’s guest commentary by Common Man:

My Mantra going forward: 

In the course of the last few months as I watched history unfold I found myself wondering and at times screaming “What in the hell are these morons doing and what are they thinking? They really don’t have an understanding of the American Majority”. I reference of course the new governmental regime controlling our country and those representatives elected by the people influencing that change. I pondered and stewed about their individual and group actions all the time trying to figure them out. I wondered how anybody could be so bent on destroying a great country, siding with other countries on how America should progress, wrecking our financial markets, destroying a fundamentally sound structure called Capitalism, and pushing our nation into bankruptcy. What factors in an individuals life would warrant such tyrannical behavior?

Guess what, I think I have an answer: It is power and the desire to possess it.

The current regime is not out of touch with the American Citizen, they just don’t agree with us, and have developed a plan to change this country into what THEY perceive it should be; a Fascist Nation managed and controlled by their ideals.

Think about that for a while and apply some logic based on current events.

If you, as a group, wanted to gain control over a nation without violence or the risk of a public upheaval, how would you go about it?

In order to passively take over a nation’s control both legislatively and economically you need to accomplish the following:

  • They are STILL Laughing at YOU, Gullible Americans

    They are STILL Laughing at YOU, Gullible Americans

    Locate and polish an individual that possesses and presents poise, thoughtfulness, strength, appreciation for the down trodden, intelligence, charisma, and change – Obama

  • Gather together a group of Representatives already in seated positions of power that could control and/or influence the majority of their peers – Pelosi, Reed, Biden, Geitner, etc, etc.
  • Construct a plan that addresses and obtains the control over both the 3 divisions of government and the economy – Stimulus Bill, New Tax Legislation, Mandate Treasury Department roles and jurisdiction. 
  • Promise the citizens a better life and promote a butterfly and blue skies lifestyle.
  • Gain a majority vote in the House and the Senate – They were close as a result of the last election and are now without opposition as a result of the Arlen Specter flop
  • Control the Executive Office so that everyone is in lockstep – Barry (I refuse to call him President since I don’t recognize him as mine) is in the White House and he is both the puppet and puppet master.
  • Control the Supreme Court – Now that Barry gets to appoint a new Supreme Court Justice the Court is sure to become predominately liberal. This will certainly influence and promote new liberal laws that will support the regimes endeavor. 
  • Partner up with and befriend the Media – With the exception of Fox News they have them all wrapped around their finger.
  • Eliminate or control the ability of people to pose opinions that differ from the current regime – Invoke the Fairness Doctrine and control the FCC licensing process.
  • Monitor and Control the Internet to minimize or eliminate open forums that oppose the current regime – The Cyber Security Act of 2009
  • Control the Unions – Historically they (Democrats) have always had the Union vote, but now with the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies the Unions have even more influence
  • Geithner: Financial Czar

    Geithner: Financial Czar

    Control the economy and financial environments – This is crucial! They now own and control a great many of the banks and financial institutions, while at the same time are blackmailing those that didn’t take TARP monies to do so. Couple that with seizing control over the Treasury and you now control the throttle of Capitalism. This is mission critical: They can’t beat Capitalism idealistically, so they control its ability to thrive, so that down the road they can stand up and tell the Kool-Aid drinkers it failed and there’s is a better way.  

  • Control the Citizen vote by giving non-citizens voting rights and by controlling the Electoral College – Let as many illegal aliens over the boarder, give them Social Security benefits, provide them jobs, and let them send their earnings back to their home country to attract more illegal aliens. Right now 25 states in the Union have Electoral College laws that mandate the Representatives vote per the popular vote of each state. The House is encouraging the representatives of those states to change those laws.
  • Trash the Constitution by imposing International Law – When they can’t get their way legally they work to change judicial prudence.
  • Trash the individual Amendments in the Constitution – Dismiss the right of the People to “Keep and bare Arms” – If you remove the weapons of an opposing force how will they fight tyranny?
  • Tell the Country and its Citizens that the only other party is a bunch of Racists Rednecks that hate Blacks and other minorities. Use the Mainstream Media to enforce that belief.
  • Negotiate, or attempt too negotiate relationships with our enemies – Cuba, Iran, Argentina, etc, etc.
  • Global_Warming_Predictions_MapFabricate an ecological disaster in order to create businesses dependent on a government for success – Start with the Car Manufactures and make them, as a result of bailouts, build “Green” cars. Create “Green” technology that also depends upon government influence to succeed. Use these new mandates to shut down opposing entities and legitimate businesses. Force unrealistic laws and rules upon the current utility companies that force them to change services offered and power types supplied.  
  • Downplay the voice of the conservative American that believes in God, Country, Family, Truth, Liberty, and the right to self preservation – Call them Rednecks, hayseeds, Racists and stupid and have the Media broadcast news that reflects the same.
  • Pass laws in the House and Senate that are Unconstitutional – The Stimulus Bill, R-45, Bonus Taxes in excess of 80%, etc, etc.
  • Develop and mandate Public School curriculum that touts their beliefs, dismisses individualism, enforces government rule, chastises conservative behavior and negates true American History – This strengthens their foundation by teaching our children and grandchildren to believe in entitlement.

From this I, and those I call friends, have concluded that we are not fighting an “Out-of-touch” regime, we are fighting a brilliant and calculated foe bent on the re-organization of our nation. Using this as the foundation for our battle (I want to make a point here that battling does not involve acts of violence, or transgressions against individuals or political parties) we can better prepare our opposition and improve our chances for turning the tide. One of the first things we can do as a force is start a third party, (The American Party) and then vote out all those local, state and federal representatives that don’t support our beliefs? Give the government the enema it needs to cleanse.  

We believe that the people of this country need a wake up call and re-education or we will all soon be calling ourselves “Comrades”.



  1. Well organized, but very depressing to have the truth outlined so succinctly.
    USWeapon tells us that we all need to start thinking but I am afraid that some greater action is required. What if all the liberty lovers, tea partyers etc. all stop their withholdings so they don’t get anymore money until next April.
    What else can be done? Can we sue the Unions?
    I am a 5th gen. Californian and DAR, I am just heartbroken over what the liberals have done to my state and country.

    • Jamie;

      It is eye opening, but I am a fir believer that one must first address reality to understand the actions needed to change direction.

      As my father always told me you cannot get to your destination until you first know where you are.

  2. Vinnster says:

    Well said.

  3. Common Man:

    You beat me to the punch. I was hoping to unveil the name “American Party” after we got done with the Building a Foundation for Resurrection series. It is so much more catchy than VDLG. Although if we use letters eveyone will be asking; what is that?

    Quite frankly I have been surprised no one has proposed that name anywhere I know of, until now. The next few weeks will be interesting.


    • JAC, Me and my Dad and Brother have discussed An “American Party” before. Several months ago as a matter of fact.

      But in our discussions, it wasn’t a Third Party. It was the ONLY Party.

      One of the beliefs of our Party (remember this was before I started coming here) was that ALL people running for office should only run as Americans, and state whether or not they were Liberal or Conservative or Moderate when announcing their intent to run. Then they would be held to whatever belief they declared to by Law. In other words, you would not be able to pull an Arlen Specter or Justice Souter on the people who elected you.

      This was just one example of the platform. Since coming here and talking to others and going to other sites and gaining more political “education”, I have become so caught up in these discussions I haven’t given it much thought. Maybe I should start to. Some of my positions have changed, so the platform would change also.

      It’s raining and stormy here but at least I got out of my son’s Baseball tournament this weekend. I always look foward to the start. And long before the end, I’m ready for it to be over. Hope you and yourn are well. EHG

      • Esom:

        You finally got me to bite. Couldn’t take it anymore. Your talking to a baseball guy so I gotta ask, what league is your son playing in?

        Do you have more than one playing ball?


        • I only have one in Baseball. He is 13 and on a Travel Ball team. Used to be in Dizzy Dean (like Little League)Now they play in USTBA, USSSA, , BPA, Southern Baseball, and other tournaments. They won the USTBA GA State Championship last year. Won the USTBA Spring Nationals this year.

          He is VERY good. A natural born athlete. He also has a cousin that the pros are watching. We are just trying to feed the talent. It’s about to kill us financially though. He usually plays around 100 games every year.

          My other son is 20. He used to play, but not now. Bless him, he was good but had to work harder at it. This youngest one is something to watch.

          I have tried to get him to play Football (my game) but so far with no success past 10 years old.

          • ESom;

            I he loves baseball encourage. Stay away Football it’s far more risky and will deter from his baseball.

            I played football for 12 years, even some semi-pro and you don’t want to know about all the repercussions.

            • SFC Dick says:

              Fellas, good day.

              Baseball is the GREATEST.

              Combining the individual and team aspect perfectly.

              The most alone I ever felt was in baseball, I wrestled, but baseball had the whole team on my shoulders.

              If you have never been at bat, bottom of the ninth, 2 outs runners on 1st and 3d down by a run then you have never lived.

              “All enlisted men are stupid, but they are cunning and deceitful and bear considerable watching.”

  4. Great article CM. That may may the whole truth in a nutshell, so to speak. I’m finishing up the final touches of the garden today (far from home and any cities). Hope everyone has a great day!


  5. whitehorn says:

    Great article the American people better wake up before its to late and hes not my president either Im with Gman get away from the cities and im a menber of the American Party

  6. Barberian says:

    Good points Common Man!

    I have my doubts on the third party viability but we sure could use one. The new party could be like a “one legged man” in an ass-kicking contest. Just means that it may be a little more painful getting your way, but can still be done.

    One good reason for a third party here in Florida is that some in the FGOP are trying to invoke “Rule 11” to by-pass a repub primary for Senator Martinez’s seat. They are trying to disqualify Rep. Rubio from the race and give it to that white rhino Crist with no opposition.

    Another reason I dropped the Repubs.

    “The genius of republican liberty seems to demand on one side, not only that all power should be derived from the people, but that those intrusted with it should be kept in dependence on the people, by a short duration of their appointments; and that even during this short period the trust should be placed not in a few, but a number of hands.” James Madison, 1788 Federalist Paper #37

    Term limits anyone? 🙂

    • Afternoon Barberian! Of course they want to get Crist in the nomination. He’s good buddies with The Obamanator himself. He would be just another rubberstamp vote for whatever that bastard wants.

      • Sorry for the vulgar word. Obama is starting to seriously getting under my skin.

        • Barberian says:

          No apology neccessary Esom, I find myself slipping into the mode more often lately.

          As far as Crist is concerned, this is their way of obtaining bypartisanship in the Senate. As far as I’m concerned, to hell with bypartisanship when one group continues to take what Freedoms I have left. Why on earth would I want to work with them on anything.

          By the way I love your Gadsden, I’m currently fighting my homeowners assoc. over mine. They say I can only have the Stars and Stripes and an armed forces flag. I told them that it was an armed forces flag for the Continental Marines. Just got blank looks. They are suspicious of me anyway due to my frequent extended travels to Mid East and North Africa. I think I frighten them, I hope so!:)

          • Well, I’m trying not to cuss to much. It’s a habit from my wilder days and with the political climate these days, I find it harder to control.

            The next time Obama goes on a trip, I hope when he gets back to the White House, his mama runs out from under the porch and bites him on the leg! 😀

          • My Gadsden Flag Avatar is also the header for my Blog Site. “The Esom Hill Gazette”

            Sorry US. Quick plug for my site. I need more readers.

            • SFC Dick says:

              Esom, old buddy,

              I can’t even keep up with the goings on on this site. I started going over to Gunny’s Rowverings but I can’t do both, let alone 3.

              I feel like the slow witted kid in class that is falling behind.

              Barbaian, get some man jammies on your next trip then wear them around the yard. The neighbors will dig that.

              I’m goona get several and wear them about my activities on Freedom Ride.

              I stroll about ussually in some mixed uniform of forieng armies or of some modifide past US variant.

              I am a seemstress and tailor nice little outfits for such ocassions.

              Yes, I sew, cook, curl up on the couch with popcorn an watch movies, love to snuggle and have spent much time reading womens magazines.

              I sometimes wonder anout my true sex.

              I look in the mirror and my bulging biceps, thick neck and back give me a clue, but the tell tail is more new hair growing out of my ears than on top of my head.

              “All enlisted men are stupid, but they are cunning and deceitful and bear considerable watching.”

  7. Richmond Spitfire says:

    Hi Common Man,

    Great Article and “Right On”!

    I’ll be sharing this article with friends and family today.


  8. Birdman says:

    Good article and I agree with your view. I know secession is the last resort but I am beginning to think that there is no way to turn the clock back and restore our constitutional law. States are beginning to assert their rights and I hope it gains momentum. On the Glenn Beck show, there is a movement organized by a few state representatives and here is the link:

    • Barberian says:

      Good morning Birdman,

      I believe that the starting point is going to be through “States rights” to nullify many of the Un-Constitutional powers asserted by the federal government. If a few states such as Texas can do this, with their infrastructure, they could “go Galt” if you will. As a successful example hopefully other states will follow suit. It would be more like a “soft sucession” so to speak.

      Other than that, I believe we are in for some very demanding times so “suit up MF’r”

      “In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” – Mark Twain

    • Birdman and Barberian

      AS i said before “Right-On” and Barberian is hitting it on the head with a “soft secession” and a possible starting point is the 2nd Amendment, which is where TX, MT and OK started. It is a critical right and one that Barry and his cronies are working diligently to eradicate.

      BTW: Not only do we start at the state, but at the same time we work the local as well. Our future leaders are to a some degree going to come from those ranks down the road.

  9. Richmond Spitfire says:

    Hi all,

    I’m on a bit of a roll this morning; have to go clean the dreaded garage, so trying to psych myself up!

    The liberal left absolutely love catchy buzzwords for issues that they can stand behind (Ex: Global Warming)…Maybe we need to start some of our own.

    For the phenomenon of the chipping away at our Constitution, how about calling it “Constitutional Cooling”.


    • RS

      I like the idea. What do you think about “Environmental Revolution”? I mean the US is an Environment, an environment made up of spirited individuals banning together promoting freedom, liberty, justice and prosperity for all.

      It is apparent to us that our “Environment” is in jepordy.

  10. Common Man, you have laid everything in a very clear manner and to think this only took 3 short months! It is a well-oiled machine and has been in the making for many, many years.

    I like the American Party – still not totally sold on the third party concept, but liking it more and more each day.

  11. Good morning and great posting Common Man!

    You made a very complex problem with our country seem do-able. I for one have always thought a third party concept would make members of the two party system at least more accountable to their constituents. It appears the common man in todays society has been left out of the loop and is there to just work, pay taxes and to support the governments ineptness. We are not the ones looking for entitlements or hand outs, we are the backbone of our country and damn proud of it!

    • Larry

      I am with ya buddy, and like you I am tired of being surpressed and/or ignored by those who view my contributions to society null and void.

      If it wasn’t for the Common Man, this country would not have gained its superiority. Those of us who believe in the teachings of our parents, grandparents, etc must gather together and make our voices heard once again.

  12. Black Flag says:

    There is no way or means to enact the changes Common Man desires upon the federal system.

    It is completely insulated from the very reforms demanded many times by people on this site.

    If anything can be done (and I doubt it can happen even then) will need to be done at the State level.

    Attempting to ‘vote out’ politicians simply cannot work -> you do not select the candidates.

    At least in the State level, the possibility of a grass roots chosen candidates exists. It is here that all federal politicians get their start and their one chance to be ‘acquired’ by the ELITE.

    It is also here that resistance (though weak) to the Elite exists.

    But the day is coming that it won’t happen here either.

    California is voting on Monday for a tax increase – even with which won’t solve their budget problem.

    The vote will be a defeat for the government.

    California will be bankrupt – and the feds will bail them out. This will transfer the last independence of a State – its finances – to the feds.

    The last vestiges of the Republic are days away from being tossed away and the achievement of an Empire will be finalized.

    • BF

      You are correct at the Federal level, although there is a chance that someone currently in the limelight will garner elumination and champion a Common Sense approach to government. Wishfull dreams I know, but you never know….

      Otherwise I disagree. We are Americans and we can accomplish anything. As a great man said:

      “What a man can percieve he can achieve”

    • Amazed1 says:

      CA & the New Englad states are in bed with the Fed’s so deep now that the good people of those areas could not even begin to get state rights back…if all they have left is their ability to legislate finanace they don’t have much left anyway. You are correct in that it has to start at the state level. It is amazing how corrupt the Fed’s have become. But those people are elected on the state level. It will be up to the states to change what is going on in or Government…providing we can find enough people who actually care enough to vote.

    • Godzilla says:

      I’d love to see a third party, but the MSM is going to fight it tooth and nail. Not saying impossible, but it will be hard to get the message across to the masses, this is going to have to a largely internet deal and hopefully BO won’t shut the internet down if it gains momentum.

  13. BF is correct “If anything can be done (and I doubt it can happen even then) will need to be done at the State level. ”

    It must be done in 75% of the states to be precise.

    Do you have the votes in your state?
    Start counting.

    • I have already written to my Reps about the 10th Amendment. Don’t know if they’ll listen or even if it would help anyway though. The Bills MT and TX are trying might though. I have heard that other States are interested in these too. TAKING the power back from the Feds. We should as States not HAVE to ask the Feds PERMISSION to assert our States Sovereignty.

      • Montana picked guns because it is a religeous issue, like Texas and its’ sovereign Republic status.

        My original idea was light bulbs. A big state could tell the feds to take ther flourescent bulbs and stick em.

        Takes a state big enough to pay for the manufacturing costs.

        I’m sure there are other things that are regulated by the fed.


  14. I have one more for everyone to poder.

    If we are so confident in our democratic republic and capitalist form of govt then why are we so paranoid about a few communist govts popping up in central or south america? Or anywhere for that matter.

    It seems to me they are destined to fail so why do we do everything in our power to alienate and anger their citizens against us insteady of letting their own misguided actions fall upon themslves?

    I happen to believe that we are not moving fast enough to reverse decades of stupid behavior and to try and re-establish at least some mutual respect with our neighbors in the western hemisphere. We don’t have to kiss their backsides either. Just stop trying to tell them what to do and then open up “truly fair” trade with them.

    Anyone ever notice that poor countries gravitate to socialism or communism but as they become more affluent the people start talking democracy? So why do we try so hard to keep them poor?

    Hope this ripples the water a little.

    • JAC

      Frankly, I think it’s just a reflex action. To this day, when you listen to talk radio and the issue of Russia arises,you will hear the callers and sometimes the host refer to it as the Soviet Union.

      There are those that think the USSR went underground. Someday they will rise again, unfurl the Hammer and Sickle to the strains of the “Internationale” and pick up where they left off. No doubt they will have sent secret missiles back into Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua.

      This falls into one of those complex conspiracies that can’t possibly work. I agree, love those little South and Central American suckers to death, build better hotels and casinos in Havana again (let us buy up the’57 Chevy’s) and watch the Commies fall.

      I really wish that we had engaged Russia more after the fall. Had Reagan still been president I think we would have. That country had more bad things happen to it in the 20th Century than anyone else. The West inaugurating a new Marshall plan for them would have been a great idea. Instead we tried to “punish” them for sins they were no longer guilty of.

    • Black Flag says:

      Mises articulated why Socialism will always fail economically.

      It removes the ability of a competent pricing mechanism to determine relative value of things.

      Without a pricing mechanism that is based on economic value (vs. say, social value), the economic choices of consumers and suppliers will tend to spend wealth in weak and poorer investments, and over time, the wealth will be eventually consumed – like eating one’s planting seeds – eventually nothing grows.

      There will always be those that deem themselves deserving of someone else’s labor. In the end, they eat themselves.

    • Good point JAC. It sort of reminds of the Christians who were all in a knot about the Harry Potter books. If they’re so convinced that theirs is the one true faith, that it is the best thing for all humanity, and that Jesus Christ is the son of God, why are they so afraid of a fiction book? I never quite worked that one out….

      • Cyndi, Not supporting, just explaining. The problem some Christians have with the Potter books is the idea of putting forth witchcraft as a “good” thing to learn and use.

        I have a cousin who is learning and reading about Witchcraft and Wiccan from reading books like those.

        Personally though, I think that pitching a fit about a fictional book is stupid if you have taught your children right. (or what you feel to be right)

        I also think that the more hubub is made about something, the more curious people become to find out just what the hubub is about.

        • Esomhillgazette,

          I totally agree with you. If you taught your children, then, that’s all you can do, and it should be enough. I think it may be due to a lack of genuine faith, that they are so threatened by a work of fiction. As for those like your cousin, most of them eventually come to their senses.

          My daughter is planning on attending Ol’ Miss this fall, and I must admit I’m a bit concerned about the ‘kool-aid’. When I mentioned this to her, she said not to worry, she ‘knows the deal and besides, there aren’t a lot of left wingers there’. She’s a smart girl with a good head on her shoulders for a 21 year old. I have faith she’ll be fine…

      • RWBoveroux says:


        I have been trying to put together a logical response to you and Esom for about 30 minutes and have come up with nothing because my mind keeps getting ahead of my fingers and what I end up typing is total and complete junk. So here we go in short form.

        1. To someone who is in a personal and active relationship with Jesus Christ and has asked Him to forgive them of their sins (True definition of a Christian), the Potter books are a bad idea.

        2. the reason for this is proved by Esom’s comment about his cousin. If you believed that smoking cigarettes is a bad thing for your children, would you take them to a movie on how to learn about smoking and how cool it is? If you believe that cigarettes are a bad idea, wouldn’t you speak out against something that is advocating cigarette use to young children? Why shouldn’t people who oppose witchcraft and other dark activities not do the same thing?

        3. Yes, you are both right that as parents we are responsible for teaching what we believe to our children. But our responsibility does not end there. We should not tell our children that X is wrong and then allow them, or their friends, to go and do X.

        4. Yes the book is fictional, but the ‘power’ of that subject matter is one that will harm people to no end. Do I think that someone who follows this series will turn around and try to cast a spell on me? No. But once again I point to Esom’s cousin and a lot of other people who have been enticed into some very evil things.

        • RWBoveroux
          You’re the first Christian I’ve come across who can give a sensible explaination for their dislike of the Potter books. I can respect that position. Unfortunately, none of the people I heard complaining, and or demanding book banning, could make a clear argument. It seemed to me that they didn’t know why they were against these books, just that they were supposed to be. It looked more like mindless bleating than anything else. Thanks for helping me to understand.

          • Kristian says:


            To put a bit finer point on it for you, it states in the Bible that we are to abstain from evil, even the appearance of it. That we are to live our lives in a way that reflects Christ and the relationship that we have with Him. Make sense?

            • USWeapon says:

              Does the bible say specifically that Harry Potter’s magic is evil or the appearance of evil?

              Is intolerance of opposing beliefs or different choices in any way reflective of the life that Jesus Christ led?

              Just some thoughts. I am not trying to bash Christians, just play a bit of devil’s advocate on the subject.

        • USWeapon says:

          RW and all,

          I think a point is being missed here. Again we find ourselves discussing the idea of christians being up in arms about something and protesting it.

          I have zero problem with christians who refuse to read the books or allow their children to read them. What I have a gigantic problem with is the moment they start feeling that they have the right to in any way interfere with ME reading them or watching the movies.

          Esom’s cousin did not become a Wiccan by watching or reading Harry Potter. I know several Wiccans. Their beliefs and practice are NOTHING like what Harry Potter books portray.

          We must be careful when we talk about the idea that by allowing “x” we are ruining someone’s soul. You are right, someone who has a personal relationship with Jesus will reject the books, at least hypothetically. However, you don’t have the right to reject it for them, or to force them to have that personal relationship if they are not interested.

          We either support the idea of individual liberty for all, or we support the idea of individual liberty within our personal morals and beliefs. There is no middle ground here. One is sound based on principles. The other is contradictory in the most obvious way.

          I would say that Christians must determine which camp they are going to fall into. The time has come to stop thinking that Jesus is the only way for every man whether that man likes it or not. Banning books and picketing works of fiction is but a small step away from the Muslim belief that all who follow any other religion than Islam should be killed.

    • I agree with you completely JAC. Let the idiots go Commie or Socialist if they want. Be just as friendly and supportive as hell about their decision.

      Trade with them like there’s no problem cause there truly ain’t no prob, Bob. Then, when they fall on their ass because their system has never, ever worked. Let them get themselves out of it.

      We try to keep our foot on their necks because it’s once again all about the power. IMHO, we have enough problems of our own. Piss on the other Central and SA Countries. Let them tend to themselves.

  15. Thank you Common Man.

    You touch on something interesting. The ability of the party of the left to hold sway over its members keeping them in perfect lockstep (goosestep?), even when out of power. One would have thought that the defeats back to Reagan would have served to bring them rightward but in fact they have continued the inexorable path to the left. When they run for office, the rhetoric moves to the center, when they win, they go back to where they were the last time they were in power with the sole exception that their position is now even more radical than before.

    Two examples, 1. the death of Welfare reform. There was absolutely no reason in the world to revisit this issue again. The reforms worked. Ignoring it cost them nothing. There was no outcry, even among their own rank and file, to change it back but they did anyway. Why, and more to the point, why make it even more liberal (in the bad sense) than before? 2. Gun control. Bill Clinton told them this was a loser but they are back, worse than ever and have have had to drum up this craziness about Mexican Drug Lords (MDL’S)to get any traction. Name any other issue from education to defense spending and it’s the same. One would think that they have been in power all these years and that all they now propose is nothing but a continuation of more of the same. I’m not sure that’s clear so here is an analogy. They are in power, they accomplish A_B_C_D_E. They are out of power 15 years and come back to: L_M_N_O_P. It is as if in the intervening years they accomplished the missing letters. Hope that’s a little more clear.

    I wonder why the Party of the right can never do this. Oh, they are accused of it all the time, let’s not forget those right wing evangelical Christians that just keep pushing the party ever rightward (hah!) but the reality is the Repubs do change, fight amongst each other and compromise. The dems rarely have a Snow, Spector, Collins etc telling them they must ape the policies of the other party. The closest they came recently was Lieberman who only deviated from the mantra on the war. He still has never met an abortion he doesn’t like.

    • SK

      Your entire thought is worth additional thought and comment, however it requires more brain power than I have today. Blame it on the post hunt celebration and consumption of Adult beverages at my brother-in-laws.

      I will say this. The demos (calling them this for lack of an all in compassing label) only have one agenda; control. They have an advantage over Repubs, the Media, the best press agent known to the free world. Couple that with their success in brainwashing the general population into a sense of entitlement and the advantage is gained.

      The Repubs lost their calling and winning stance post Reagan. Since then they have tried to battle the Demos by being more like them and moving more toward the left of the middle ground. As a result the two parties are more alike than different.

      I think the Repubs have lost valuable time trying to figure out what they have to portray
      to win over the public. They should have focused on what enabled them to win and get back to those basics.

      More on this down the road.

      • A little more food for thought regarding my take on the demos. The repubs are now demonized as “the party of no”. How this happens I don’t know other than to blame the media for their usual sloppiness (at least) or their complicity (at worst).

        My question, if you are for a stimulus package of 350 billion but against a package of 600 billion how can you be a party of no? No would imply you are for a stimulus package of zero. 2nd question, if you support civil unions and equal rights for homosexuals with the exception of Marriage (defined in most churches as a union of man and woman and sacred) then how can you be the party of no? Again no would be no civil unions, no shared benefits, status quo ante, circa 1970.

        It comes back to the total control party leaders have on the followers. Nothing less than complete surrender can be accepted from the other side. I think the real problem is that those of us who disagree allow them to set the debate and define it, ALL THE TIME. Our side, afraid I guess to be “mean spirited”, will not ever point these things out.

  16. Common Man,
    Great post and you are right on point! Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us all.

  17. Common man, you may be right about the political parties on the left (which more and more are including the Republican party), I don’t know. I do have to say this though, I think the average American who supports the Democratic Party and President Obama is not evil. They are either desperate, stupid, or have a great deal of faith in the “elite class’s” ability to make better decisions than the rest of us.

    A liberal believes an all-wise government should be used to force people to behave in certain ways. A Conservative believes that a flawed and potentially dangerous government should be limited to protecting life liberty and property and naught else. Even if ther’es suffering, people are smart enough and resourcefull enough to figure it out and fix their own problems.

    • Michelle

      I think the majority of Libs believe a number of things, most of which I don’t, or don’t to the degree they do. Some of them hate those that obtain success, some just think that conservatives are racists and bigotted. I am sure there all kinds in both parties.

      It maybe the case that a great deal of Lib Representatives feel the current leaders are going to the exteme, but they fear the repercussions of their seniors.

      I don’t feel that Barry is evil in the true sense of the word, but he does believe that the government can fix all the problems and the average citizen is to stupid to run theri own lives.

  18. Here’s something crazy. The Republican of Spokane County, Washington have demanded a list of all Northwest Tea Party participants who had registered on their site. The Republicans claim the Tea Party organizers had promised them that list. Tea Party says, no way! NW Tea Party is now preparing for a legal fight (which they cannot afford) to keep the list of participants private.

    • Sounds to me like The Republican Party there is trying to take over. They want the Lists so that they can co-opt the people. Shame on them for being the Politicians that they sound like.

  19. Black Flag says:

    A quote, offering the ideas to move forward?

    Isn’t secession the ultimate vote in a supposed democracy?

    “It cannot seriously be argued today that international law prohibits secession. It cannot seriously be denied that international law permits secession. There is a privilege of secession recognized in international law and the law imposes no duty on any people not to secede. While international law does not foreclose on the possibility of secession, it does provide a framework within which certain secessions are favored or disfavored, depending on the facts. The key is to assess whether or not Kosovo meets the criteria for the legal privilege of secession.”

    But a privilege granted by whom?

    So it appears our rulers are quite conflicted when it comes to the recognition of secession on the world stage. We need to leverage this schizophrenia.

    “They can jail us. They can shoot us. They can even conscript us. They can use us as cannon fodder in the sod. But – But we have a weapon more powerful than any in the whole arsenal of their Empire – and that weapon is our refusal. Our refusal to bow to any order but our own, any institution but our own.

    Our friends in the Government would like to shut me up. Oh yes, jail me again, shoot me, who knows?

    And when they do, I’d like you to send them a message.

    If they shut me up, who’ll take my place?”

    “I cannot teach you violence, as I do not myself believe in it.

    I can only teach you not to bow your heads before any one even at the cost of your life.”

    ~ Mahatma Gandhi

  20. CM, I really enjoyed your article. You bring out a lot of points that I agree completely with.

    One thing. Do you think this is a plan just a year or so in the making? Or do you think someone has spent years planning this, just waiting on the right circumstances and the right person to bring it to fruition?

    I think the latter. I’d like to know yours and anyone else’s opinion.

    Not a Conspiracy Theory. A carefully thought out and patient plan.

    • Esom

      I think it is a plan that was in practice for some time (FDR forward) and has been worked and re-worked since. I believe they thought they had the appropriate puppet with Wild Bill, but he fell from grace because of his extra curricula activites and Hilary. Because of that they needed to find a new front man (Barry). Iraq, the economy and other factors has contributed to their current success.

      One thing is for sure these people are very, very tenacious.

  21. Birdman says:

    Black Flag, can you articulate a plan that will work to save this country? What do you recommend?

    • First Birdman you have to define what you mean by “save”.

      From what and to what? Oh yeah, and why?

    • Black Flag says:


      JAC beat me to it…. 🙂

      What is it that you want to ‘save’?

      JAC (and I) are asking about what is the ‘moral basis’ or ‘philosophy’ that you believe represents ‘this country’?

      If you want to save oppression, violence, etc. – I’m not your guy.

      SO… what is it that YOU want to save?

      • Can’t save what is not meant to be saved. The future has most likely been determined, we just don’t know that path or how to handle the effects of the future. We can only speculate, and prepare on that premise.

        On a better note, gardens done (1300 sq ft) and ready for planting, and what a job that was! I hope that everyone will see it soon, maybe on a Friday night.



      • Alan F. says:

        What represents America?

        America has up until now been THE GOLD STANDARD with regard to personal Freedom across this planet. If you don’t believe me, here’s an exercise for you. Look at the raw figures of ethnic peoples (income, education, nutrition, medicine, land rights etc..) and how they are doing in America compared to those in their own country of origin/ancestry.

        • Black Flag says:

          I dunno, there are many places in the world where I can smoke and drink beer while driving very fast – and no one will arrest me.

          I can be wealthy slave. But I’m still a slave.

          I can live in a house as a slave. But I’m still a slave.

          My wealth does not equal my freedom.

          This notion that because you have lots of toys means your free is the very trap that tyrants use to enslave the masses.

          • Alan F. says:

            There are many places in the world where its not YOUR land its the government’s and they are allowing you to pretend you own it.

            There are many places where its not what you have but what’s missing in the library, on the airwaves and in the schools.

            There are many places where a genetic library of the citizenry is on the table and denying corporate access to it is not.

            There are many places where that shining happy euro-immigration policy is giving way to “not in my neighborhood” as the political landscape gives way to immigrants concentrating in boroughs and becoming the majority therein.

            There are many places where under the veneer of euro-acceptance former Eastern Block citizens are still looked down upon.

            There are many places where YOUR future is decided for you by picking YOUR future educational options for YOU.

            • Alan F. says:

              Missed this one.

              There are many Americans who see only the negative of their own country and the positive of everywhere else.

            • Black Flag says:

              It is not a matter of what benefits you think you have in this country –

              — what matters is the MORAL BASIS of the country.

              • Alan F. says:

                If its all about morality who defines what exactly that is? If its absolute, start with handing everything back to the First Nations. If its what’s being said then rhetoric carries the day. If its actions then just look to the country in question’s treatment of its citizens and those who are not. Anyone can say anything at any time without meaning a word but actions can only be interpreted as they occurred. Don’t believe me? Look to Belgium, its history in the region and what happened in Rwanda between April 6 and July 16 1994. Their actions spoke the truth of their convictions. So much for the MORAL BASIS of that country.

                There are shadows in every corner of every country. Quote Ghandi all you want but realize he’d have been taken out without hesitation by most of the other countries of that time. Oh those monstrous British!

      • Birdman says:

        Black Flag, saving the country for me would be returning to capitalism, eliminating all segments of welfare programs, eliminating the large government bureaucracy, following the constitution as written, individual rights instead of collectivism, elimination of the heavy tax load, and so on and so forth. We lost our way with the progressive movement. Those that are not producers like the welfare state since they reap the benefits. Is there something that can be done to turn this around before it is too late?

        • Black Flag says:

          To answer your question directly: you have the system that is what you ask of it.

          Until you know what and why you want something, you are merely articulating what has been taught to you by others.

          Why do you want a Constitution?

          What constitutes “large” to you in terms of government?

          What does individual rights means to you?

          • Birdman says:

            Black Flag:

            If you could wave a magic wand, what would you do to fix the problems that you see in the United States?

          • Black Flag says:


            There is a series up and coming hosted by USWep, JAC and myself that is addressing the methodology to discover exactly that.

            I urge your participation this up coming week.

  22. Michelle:

    Did a separate tea party group form for North Idaho?

    If so who are the contacts?

    Are they doing anything to help the Spokane group deal with the Elephants or is the Spokane vs. N. Idaho thing getting in the way?


  23. Excellent points, JAC and BF, about the necessity to know, first and foremost, what one stands for, and what one wants in a government (or not, BF!) before moving forward. Knowing where the finish line is located is key to getting there. Without establishing this, you may get there by accident, but it is more likely you will get to some other place to which you did not intend to go.

    With that in mind, it is also true that we are all, for the most part, still learning. This is all new; we have never had to drill down to these core concepts, particularly in a way which will enable us to move forward in battle. This is no longer an esoteric exercise, but rather the first part in a strategic plan. But just because we are still defining the core principles doesn’t mean that we can’t begin assembling the moving parts of the plan. That means identifying people to run for office, building a network on the ground locally, putting all the mechanisms into place so that once you’ve nailed down the principles for which you stand, you can immediately go into combat mode. It takes a long time to do this and time is a wastin.’ I’d like to ask all of you who I respect tremendously for your passion and thoughtfulness to think about this. What actions are YOU taking NOW to put the pieces in place for the battle ahead?

  24. Black Flag says:
  25. Black Flag says:

    Alan F

    If its all about morality who defines what exactly that is?

    First – of course IT IS ALL ABOUT MORALITY!

    If you design an immoral system, what do you expect is its consequences??

    If its absolute,

    All absolutes derive from some standard, defined somewhere

    Therefore, before you claim absolutes or their existence you must define your core principle from which you’re measuring absolutes.

    • Alan F. says:

      “First – of course IT IS ALL ABOUT MORALITY!”

      You failed to address what you quoted from me. Who defines what’s immoral? The majority of the day? To many abortion is immoral while others believe it merely a method of birth control. To many capital punishment is immoral while to others its the payment for having denied someone else their right to live. To many gay marriage is immoral while others embrace the idea as social evolution. To many destroying any ecosystem is immoral while to others its a necessary when sacrifice for their notion of “greater good”. To many polygamy is immoral while to others its a basic right given to them by god. To many faith in technology is immoral while to others its merely wielding that one gift from the creator which sets us apart from all other organisms, the ability to create that which did not exist. To many atheism is immoral while to others its merely exercising common sense. To many anything is on the table when the lives of their family members is at stake while to others there is nothing about their family which would lend them to compromising their principals. You gloss over the issue like its some finite thing. Its in actuality an open ended concept subject to change by those in positions of power or the whim of 51% of the voting population come an election cycle and always always always biased by “perspective”.

      I’ve seen people chanting hate slogans in Toronto over what they perceived was an immoral bias unearned toward their ethnicity by the Metro Police and I’ve also seen the outrage at the immorality of leaving them to the mercies of their own ethnicity without the presence of that same police in their neighborhood. Oddly enough lefty John Stewart said it in his comedy act where he goes from marching and chanting “@#$% the police! @#$% the police!” in lock step with all the others to shrieking “Where the @#$% are the police!” when the demonstrators start overturning cars, setting them ablaze and smashing windows. Perspective.

      “All absolutes derive from some standard, defined somewhere.
      Therefore, before you claim absolutes or their existence you must define your core principle from which you’re measuring absolutes.” Ah but then to many the notion of absolutes is immoral, inflexibility is immoral and all the while to others its already been preordained by their religion. To those who are tagged “Islamic extremist” America’s unwillingness to accept in absolute “the word of god” is immoral and through your destruction they are delivering you to their morality which is god’s will on earth. Perspective.

  26. Your first 6 bullet points:

    Isn’t this what all political parties and politicians attempt to do?
    1. Elect a leader.
    2. Elect members of congress.
    3. Create a plan for governing.
    4. Promise the voters a better life/county/world.
    5. Elect a majority so they can implement their plan.
    6. Control the Executive Office – see #1 – Elect a leader.

    In forming a new political party, isn’t this what you would do? Elect candidates that support your plan and try to enact it?

    Other thoughts:

    Arlen Specter’s flop does not remove all opposition. Even if Al Franken gets seated, they have just 60 votes, and they don’t all vote together all the time. We’ve already seen that.

    Supreme Court – Sueter was a liberal. His replacement won’t change the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is currently CONSERVATIVE!

    Media – You forgot the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post. Both very consevative & influencial papers.

    Unions – The UAW was one of the strongest unions, but now that auto companies are weak, so is the UAW.

    Banks – the bailout started under the Bush Admin. You can’t say Obama decided to take over the banks. They’re trying to finish the clean up.

    Electoral College – If the EC shouldn’t vote based on popular vote, how should it vote?

    Negotiate with our enemies – How is better foreign relations bad for the USA?

    • USWeapon says:

      To be fair they would have 62. They have the two Republicans from Maine on most issue, which is expected since the Republican party in Maine is fairly liberal. As for them not all voting together, they don’t need to. Remember, 60 is not what is needed to pass legislation. It is simply the number needed to stop a Republican filibuster, and they will vote all together to do that. Once all 60 stop the filibuster, they only need 51 to pass a law.

      I agree that Souter’s replacement won’t change the makeup of the court. However, Souter was liberal but not far left liberal. A far left liberal appointee could be the first step towards a very liberal court. There are estimates as high as 3-4 justices being replaced by this administration should he be reelected. I also would not say the court is conservative. I would not say it is liberal either.

      The UAW is not weaker, they are richer. Look at the deals they got. Forcing a government bailout of the industry, IMO, is a show of just how strong the UAW is.

      The bank issue is a little touchy. Remember that it is Obama’s administration that is setting the “test” standards to determine who is healthy and now refusing to let some banks pay back TARP funds and eliminate government control. The financial bailout may have started under Bush, but the rules have been drastically altered since January 20.

      Negotiating with our enemies… Your question there is a regular play by the left. You are going with the fallacy that negotiating with countries like Iran, Syria, North Korea, and others will result in better foreign relations. That is simply not true. It doesn’t make our foreign relations better, it only makes those nations stronger and our country more vulnerable. I am all for good foreign relations, but negotiating with some of our biggest enemies is not the way to get there.

  27. Todd;

    USW covered a great deal of my thoughts, however let me add a few:

    The first thing you need to look at is what and how the current administration is effecting changes. Not only have they changed the rules since 1-20-09 they are stepping on Constitutional law to do it, and they are getting little resistance. (Terminations, asset seisure, budget cuts, forced foreign mergers or alliances for the autos, forced TARP funds, etc, etc)

    Every appointee is a policy and procedual clone of Barry and his parties mantra. This makes policy changes even easier and expiditious…Look how long it took to pass the Stimulus Package.

    Yes I would select and elect representatives that agreed with and promoted conservative policies, just like I would pick the best professional athletes if I was forming a football team to compete in the NFL.

    As USW said the Unions are stronger and are now better in-line with the current regime. BTW: Historically speaking the Union members have voted and supported as directed by their leaders. And if you don’t believe that those Union leaders are supportive of Barry’s policies, you need to re-think and examine things. While your at it I would also suggest you look at some of the newer Union’s garnering influence…SEIU is one example…and the support they get from ACORN.

    The Supreme Court is suppose to enforce Constitutional Law not set precidence or write laws. Appointing Judges that feel it is their moral or judicial responsibility to effect Constitutional changes is just wrong; that is the responsibility of Congress. BTW: As USW said a far left liberal appointment will upset what little balance we have left. As an example: The current Governor of Michigan has made the short list, and even though it would be a blessing to Michigan to get her out, in the long run it would be devistating to our country as a whole.

    Negotiating with our enemies does not improve our overall foreign relations, kicking their asses when provoked does. My basic position relative to enemies is leave them be as long as they are not stepping on our friends toes or ours. Let them wallow iin their own circumstances.

    The biggest reason for a third part is variety. Currently we don’t have any, it is either liberal or liberal lite.

    • Alan F. says:

      The unions still have to collect on that big investment they made in Obama do they not?

      • Alan

        Whether they collect or not isn’t really important at this time since they are supporting Barry and his regimes actions. If they don’t collect in some way it may have an impact on the election in 2012, but for now Barry is having his way with them.

  28. To All;

    Many thanks to everyone that took the time to add their thoughts and perspectives. I appreciate the support!

    Also, thanks again to USW for publishing my thoughts

    BTW: No birds, but we did spend some quality time exercising our 2nd Amendment rights sighting in some new toys.


  29. Alan F. says:

    Isn’t this what all political parties and politicians attempt to do?
    1. Elect a leader.
    2. Elect members of congress.
    3. Create a plan for governing.
    4. Promise the voters a better life/county/world.
    5. Elect a majority so they can implement their plan.
    6. Control the Executive Office – see #1 – Elect a leader.


    1. The throne.
    2. The power behind the throne.
    3. Moot.
    4. The sales pitch.
    5. Sell sell sell!
    6. Reap the rewards of your stellar pitch and have at it!

    Doesn’t your Electoral College system stymie the idea of a real third party?

    • Each state names representatives to the Electorial College and they are required to vote according to each states individual Electorial Charter/rules. 25 states have Electorial college rules that mandate each state Electorial Representative vote along with the states majority. If they don’t they are removed from their position. 25 states don’t require their Electorial representatives to vote with the majority. That is why Bush won in the intital election. He had the Electroial vote, but not the popular vote. If the Electorial College were elliminated and the popular vote named the president 2001 would have seen Gore as President.

      By eliminating the Electorial College a president would be elected by the popular vote; majority rule. It would also ensure that each vote counted and the a winner would not be named until everyone of the votes from Maine to California were counted.

      We might see different campaign processes and more candidate presence in some of the less influencial states. We might see a lot of difference altogether without the Electorial College.

      I don’t know if it stymies a third party, since we already have a number of third parties, but it might make some difference in how voters exercised their rights to vote???????

  30. The first step to resolving an issue is to make sure you have a valid understanding of the issue. If your understanding of the issue is incorrect, your solution will be incorrect.

    You have a list of opinions and half-truths about people that you obviously dislike. If your definition of the issues is based on your emotions, your solution will be invalid and will fail.

    • Todd;

      First, I am not sure if you are responding to my initial comments or replies to responses, or if you are even responding to me. I make it a habit to start with the person’s name I am responding too.

      I cannot read minds any more than anyone else out there, so I don’t have any real knowledge that Barry and his regime is in fact pushing us towards Facsisum, but their actions and the results thereof is pushing this country towards it.

      If someone else had been elected and that regime would started out by cutting taxes, government spending, federal employee wages, cut unneeded government programs, provided tax breaks for corporate growth, etc, etc, then I think the majority out there would have come to the conclusion that they were trying to shorten the recession, reduce government size, promote capitalisum and return to a constitutional government.

      Bottom line is that the current regime and its plan will lead us into a Socialist or Facsist state, regardless of whether they intended to or not

    • Alan F. says:

      Like the Gitmo closing.

  31. Ray Hawkins says:

    Common Man – I am trying to look into each of the Glenn Beckisms you have shared because I suspect many of them may be false or outright dishonest.

    1. Your statement: “Let as many illegal aliens over the boarder, give them Social Security benefits, provide them jobs…..”

    I thought the issue here (and actually from 2006) was with respect to granting formerly illegal aliens access to benefits they may have paid in as illegal aliens? (CIRA of 2006 and Senator Ensign’s amendment). Can you point me to the legislation or law that you drew this conclusion from?

    • USWeapon says:

      I would be interested in seeing this legislation as well. I am still trying to figure out in my head where I fall on immigration. I had a long standing belief, and I feel like under scrutiny my position was flawed. So now I am in no man’s land for a bit as I figure out where I really stand on the issue.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Try this on for size – I also feel very conflicted – but perhaps it is because we have established social programs that perpetuate in many ways rather than ‘help and move right along’. My feeling is that our current immigration policies are a sad testament to our heritage. Most everyone – our ancestors were immigrants once too. Now, I don’t know enough yet to feel competent on the history of immigration law, and the requirement of national security is looming – but if we extend this social darwinism thing a wee bit – should we not be more open to immigration? Will the fittest not survive? Are we protecting ourselves from an enemy or from our own unwillingness to have neighbor A that speaks spanish and neighbor B that speaks mandarin?

        In specific to the legislation – if I were an illegal immigrant with a bogus SSN and I was paying in, and then I became a legal immigrant or a citizen I do not think I have the right to what I paid in while I was an illegal. That seems to be benefiting from breaking the law only long enough to become legal. Course I could be challenged and swayed with a compelling argument here.

        • Ray,

          Both of my parenst are immigrants. My father from Italy (1927), my mother from Peru (1946). My mom is a big time anti illegal immigration in CA. She is Hispanic and speaks fluent Spanish. She understands full well what the illigals are saying and doing. Her take on the situation, is that too many of the current immigrants don’t give a damn about America. They’re here for the Reconquista or the welfare opportunities. My mother is furious. She and my dad came to the US legally, they obeyed the laws, paid the taxes, spoke the language, and most importantly of all LOVE America and what it stands for. Back in the 50’s, some of her family members came illegally. Three years later they were deported. No one in the family felt sorry for them, do you know why? Because the guilty parties chose to ignore the law and were told repeatedly not to break it. America has always been receptive to immigrants, and up until recently, immigrants have been receptive to America. Its just that the latest group seems to have different priorites than previous groups.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Thanks Cyndi – and seemingly pointed at the creation and sustaining of social/welfare systems that in addition to some good help promote enrollment and attract at times the worst in people.

        • ray,

          I have a simple question here, what is so hard about understanding that legal and illegal immigration are different? I can honestly say that among my liberal, conservative, democrat, independent, republican friends I have not yet met a single person who opposes all immigration. Most people just have an issue with the “illegal” part, as do I.

          I find most conversations on immigration, from the left tend to immediately gernerate into “AH! so your against all immigrants!” As usual, tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

          Have you seen the la Raza types, have you listened to them? Listen to the “slant” in the news. We don’t say “illegal” in the conversation anymore. The harshist term is “undocumented” mostly it’s just “immigrant” with no differentiation or “migrant”.

          I believe if you took a poll, 95% of the world would probably want to reside in the US. Ask yourself why? Then, next question becomes if that 95% or a significant part of it came here, how would it change the country? I am not talking of race or culture, I’m talking babout the place looking and smelling like Bombay. We have pretty much had unfettered immigration since the mid 1960’s. CyndiP asks why things are different. I think it is because we have not taken the time to digest the immigrants we have or allow them to asimilate. If you get to know immigrants and talk to them you will hear this very complaint from them. They don’t want their kids educated in a foreign language. they will be responsible for keeping their own culture, the government doesn’t have to do that and finally, and most telling I think, the same response my Grandad gave my father back in the ’30’s when dad asked about Russia. “It was aterrible place, I don’t want to talk about it.”

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            SK – I’m just trying to figure out exactly what “illegal” means and when it started as a legal designation for us. My thought is that it has been used as a unfortunate hammer from time to time (meaning not always or even in the majority) the same as social/welfare systems that encourage and promote abuse.

            I’m not one to decry that the right/conservatives are simply and blatantly against immigration – I support immigration opportunities the same as my ancestors had and realize we simply cannot open the borders and say come one come all.

            I’m not sure what you mean by “the place looking and smelling like Bombay” – please do explain because ‘off the cuff’ it sounds, well, racist. Get my drift?

            Most immigrants I have met:

            a. Have better English (written and spoken) than Americans born/raised here;
            b. Do still retain their original language and culture predominantly through home and social/cultural activities;
            c. Are better tooled to integrate into the global economy because of a & b

            There is a perception, and I am not saying it is right or wrong, of us living in a cocoon – resisting the notion that there are other more powerful nations than the United States. Me – I am mad as hell that I did not learn a 2nd or 3rd language when younger. I am glad I lived in several very diverse communities and was exposed at a young age to those – I have also lived in very closed communities where there existed an inherent suspicion of anyone different – especially if that different person were from another country.

            • See, that’s what I mean, either that or I’m just getting too damn old. “Looking and smelling like Bombay” means exactly that. You can substitute any incredibly poverty stricken, overcrowded city anywhere in the world for Bombay if you want. No rant regarding any race, just incredibly bad circumstances, not caused by the current residents. Open the doors for everybody without figuring in assimilation, you know it has to end up that way.

              I agree with you on the issue of immigrants and their proficency with the language and their desire , at least in the first generation, to hold onto part of their culture. But, and this is a big but, I find that to be true for the majority of legal immigrants not illegals. The illegals are routinely abused and taken advantage of by everybody and that includes their fellow countrymen. They are here to eke out a sustinance living and are in the shadows they rarely associate with outsiders.

              Illegal, in the old Websters standby is: adj. contrary to law, unlawful. So, not to be a smart ass here, if you are in this country unlawfully, without obeying the existing law, you are an illegal. If you are obeying the law you are legal. If you are here on a temporary visa, then if you overstay the visa you are breaking the law and become illegal. So, I have no problem with anyone legally coming to and residing in and then applying for US Citizenship.

              I would suggest that some see our current world position as permanent and that does create the notion we are in a cocoon. My analogy would be to Rome though. When Rome ran the show, Latin was the common tongue as English has become today. I don’t believe that this was deliberate. It just happened. I too bemoan the lack of a 2nd language, I blame my folks though. Mom was of Slovak descent and fluent Dad was of Russian and also fluent. Had they worked out the relatively minor differences in the languages and the major differences in pronounciation they would have used the languages and voila! I would have learned something. Didn’t happen though.

              Try growing up as a Russian/Slovak Catholic in a neighborhood 40% Irish Catholic and 40% German/Austrian Jewish. talk about suspicion! Also try to get a date when you are 17. Had the neighborhoods been a bit more mixed at the time, things would have gone smoother. From my old urban planning boots on the ground background, it was the non diverse neighborhoods that were easily blockbusted. There were parts of Brooklyn that went from being 95% white to 95% non-white in five years! The one I was familiar with had 180,000 people in it. Anyway, it is always good to know a lot about a lot. less surprises that way.

              • SKT,

                When I was in middle school, I asked my mother why she didn’t teach us Spanish (we had to take it in school). She said “We are Americans. In America we speak English”. That was pretty much the end of the discussion. could it have been similar with your parents?

              • Both Mom and Dad were born here. They went to language classes at their churches as kids. Dad spoke Russian to his mother (who never learned english) and his stepfather. When there was something us kids shouldn’t know, dad spoke with his brothers and sisters in Russian. Mom spoke to her family in Slovak too. I think like most first generation American born, they considered themselves totally American, felt no allegiance of any kind to the old country and didn’t see why they should pass this stuff on to us kids. Only one of my cousins, is proficient in Russian and that’s because my Aunt Florence married a guy with the same background. Out of about 30 cousins, she’s the only one.

                I’m glad my Dad was still alive when “Roots” came out. I, like the rest of the US I guess, suddenly had a hankering to find out “more”. Dad’s answer was why, and that’s when he told me his fathers comment about the old country being such a horrible place. A good friend of mine is Jewish, she has about as little knowledge of that part of the old world as I, same basic family circumstances. Well, in the flurry of excitement over roots, she pointed out to me that her great grandfather and mine probably lived in the same general area. She, being not much on history thought this was great. I, knowing a bit more about it thanks to Dad, burst her bubble by saying” yes, and my great grandfather probably led a pogrom against yours.”

                Before he died my father and I watched “Fiddler on the Roof”. He told me that it was exactly the way his father had described it to him. So, in the scheme of things I thank my grandfather, Andrei Nicholiavich Troyanovskii for being smart enough to get the hell out.

  32. To Everyone (or anyone, or no one, whatever),

    Some of the articles here, and a lot of the comments, are starting to sound like you’re all “victims”. And I have a whole big list of “reasons” why. But I was having a little too much fun, it is was starting to sound childish (which was one of the things on the list).

    So I’ll just leave it at this – the way you’re portraying the Democrats, the MSM, etc. It sounds like they’re all out to “get you” and there’s nothing you can do to stop them. When repeated enough times about enough issues, it starts to sound like you’re developing a ‘victim’ mentality.

    I hope you’re all better than that.

    • Todd;

      First of all, we are all in this together, as Socialist/Fascist government will negatively effect the majority. The exception being those in office running it.

      Why is it that when we express our opinions and tout facts concerning government we are whinning victims?

      Liberals bitched and moaned for almost eight years during the Bush administration and I as a conservative didn’t call any of you victims.

      I for one think there are a number of things we can do to turn the tide, and don’t intend to stand idly by and moan about it all being lost. “Anything worth having is worth working for” as my father use to say.

      I have made some statements in past responses that I believe in the free spirit and the tenacity of the American people. Yes it will take time, effort and a collective mentality, but it can be acomplished.

      BTW; stop the emotional and childlike efforts to entice anger; its a waste of time with the majority of people commenting on this site. You should understand that these folks have gone word for word with a number of irrational and seditious liberals.

      I welcome the chance to discuss openly ideas and different points of view with people. It helps me to expand my mind and at the same time garner additional ideas, but when those people weight their discussions with thoughtless emotion and seditious remarks, I disengage.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Common – part of the point is that you are presenting unfounded opinions or beliefs and then decrying anyone who asks you to back it up. A large portion of your article was devoted to sensationalistic statements that are dubious in fact. Please see post below….

    • USWeapon says:


      On the contrary, it isn’t a victim mentality. It is calling a spade a spade. If you want to keep your head in the sand, feel free. No one here is going to force you pull it out.

      Just don’t take that same tone when we say “I told you so”. You will be as hurt in the end by this as anyone. Perhaps you should be as willing to question your party and your personal philosophies as you are to question the other side’s. I know that I am. Hence why I don’t like either party right now.

      You can continue to call opposing points of views whining and victim mentality. What you have not done is show a shred of evidence that those opposing points are INCORRECT.

      What I am looking for is a “you guys are wrong and over reacting, and here is why…” I know how much those on your side hate to hear the words “show me some facts to back up your emotions”. But you keep hearing it because instead of showing the facts, you merely tell us how unfair it is that we ask for them.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        A spade is only a spade if it is, actually a spade. Spewing beliefs rather than aren’t supported by facts or skew the facts is not a spade.

    • I’m jumping in here too. Are you one of those people who believe that things will always be the same, that they will only deviate from the norm plus or minus 2 percent?

      Do you believe that It can’t happen here? Because if you are, there are Wiemar Germans, pre-’59 Cubans, Pre 1917 Russians, Pre 1923 Italians, Pre 1937 Spainiards I’d like to introduce you to. In addition, maybe some Japanese Americans circa 1941-45, some black Americans for about the last 300 years, a whole lot of native Americans and a few others you should really get to know. They might just disabuse you of some misguided notions.

      Maybe we are alarmists, who knows? Actually, I really hope so. I hope that we are wrong, that this thing won’t end as badly as we seem to think it will. I hope my four children, all in their 20’s and ’30’s can enjoy a decent life and that does not necessarily include making big bucks.

      What we are not are rose colored glasses optimists. When you reach 62, assuming you have an open mind and are not just one of many sheeple, look back and see what freedoms have been lost in your lifetime.

      Under the guise of giving us more rights, like being able to F— like bunnies anywhere, anytime without messy little consequences , they have slowly but surely started infringing on little things like freedom of speech (hate speech), property rights(Eminent domain), freedom of religion(Don’t dare call it Christmas break), you know, all those “unimportant” little things. Peace, Love, Dope, that’s the ticket.

      If the above makes me a whiner, so be it.

    • Yes, the Liberals were in ‘victim’ mode after the 2000 election. Remember all the cries about how unfair the Supreme Court decision was that ended the Florida recount? It took them several years to get over that, during which time the Republicans and the Bush administration pushed them around. I see that happening in reverse right now.

      I’m not trying to entice anger. Quite the opposite, I was trying to point out how someone with a different point of view sees the conversation here. I simple see the same themes reoccurring in many of the posts and comments, and hadn’t seen an effort to advance the conversation from what is wrong to how to change it. That is why I posted the comment a few days ago asking US Weapons about his “vision” for this. I remember he had mentioned it once, and thought having at least the ‘frame work” laid out would help the conversation take a more positive direction.

      I shortened my comment #32 because I was being CHILDISH, and that was wrong on my part. It would not advance the conversation, but would entice anger, which was not my intent. I should have also removed the “having fun” line because that is just shorthand for the childish comments and is unproductive in any conversation/dialog/debate.

      While unintentional, my childish comments evoked your response, which makes my point. When childish emotion is used in these types of discussions, it only serves to inflame, no matter which side it comes from (I’ve reworded this several times and I’m not sure it comes across right). I made inappropriate comments, and it caused your response? One of the main things I see here over and over is the name-calling (yes, liberals to it do I find that equally unproductive). It doesn’t advance the conversation. It just drags it down.

      I don’t call all opposing points of view victim mentality, and I constantly question my philosophies and those in power. I was a conservative until 2003, and have been questioning my philosophy and that of our leaders ever since. I don’t read this blog so I can look for things to poke fun at or stir up anger. I call a spade a spade when I see it that way, but I see more shades of grey than black & white.

      I laid out some of my feelings in post #26. In a topic like this, it’s more personal opinion than fact. We disagree on many of those points. I’ve provided many facts when appropriate, and have never shied away from a ‘fight’. There are limits to how much time I spend doing this, and being in the minority here there are more ‘questions’ to my comments/responses than I have time to respond too.

      I don’t think things will always be the same. Quite to the contrary, I’m always looking for ways to improve things. And that’s what I do for a living – look at our IT systems and develop ways to get from point A to point B. The thing is, you can’t just throw out point A (the current system – whether business, government, or political) and jump to point B, because in the interim you would have chaos (although some people think that might be good, and some days I do to).

      I’m also not a rose colored glasses optimist. Getting from point A to point B is a lot of work, and sometimes you have to bring some people along kicking and screaming, although its better to gain their support because it only takes a few bad apples to rot the entire barrel. And assuming you get to point B and things are really better, telling anyone “I told you so” is never productive. Because the next time when I make a mistake, it just comes back to bite me on the butt.

      To someone with a different point of view, the name-calling and unflattering assumptions in some of the comments taint the entire conversation. If you want to influence my philosophy, show me a positive vision and the path that leads to it. A list of everything the liberals are doing wrong is easy to compile – even I could do that.

      Today’s topic on philosophy is quite interesting. I’ve just skimmed thru it tonight, but it seems to make my point from #30 above. You have to base your philosophy on a solid foundation. I don’t see that solid foundation in this topic.

      My ‘victim’ mentality comment was meant to spur some introspection and hopefully turn the conversation to a positive/productive direction. I still hope that happens.

      • USWeapon says:

        I appreciate your clarification. I don’t know that I gave much of a response beyond saying what I do, which is calling a spade a spade. I do have a direction and that was the philosophy discussions that were upcoming. The first two have now been posted and I think that you will see that the purpose, at least for me, is to ensure that we all begin to wrap our heads around the problems in the right way, remove the partisan ideology, and begin to formulate solutions that are in line with principled positions that are not full of contradiction.

        I admit that I lean conservative and tend to get frustrated with liberal arguments because so often the liberal positions are filled with contradiction and emotion that are obvious to me. That is not to say that the conservative positions are not those things as well. I don’t find them as obvious, and I appreciate when the contradictions and emotion are pointed out.

        I know that you see my posts discussing the moves of democrats in congress and this administration as silly and partisan. As you said, the assumption is that anyone could easily come up with a list of what liberals are doing wrong. The same can be said for conservatives. However, I think that making this assumption is the mistake that many people have made for too long. I think that most people DON’T see the obvious flaws in these things or see that what the politicians are doing wrong. I created the site to educate what I felt was a fairly naive American public and with a continually growing readership, I try to continue to do that while simultaneously working to improve the philosophical base of the regular commenters like you and those you are familiar with here. THAT is why I do it, not because I have issues with only conservatives. The conservatives are not able to do much for me to point out these days, so I am limited to a few articles here and there pointing out flaws in conservative positions, rather than the plethora of actions that are available for critique from Democrats in power making lots of moves.

      • Just a quick one here.When I talked of things not remaining the same, I was talking of possible socioetal disintegration into something radically different. Hence, my historical references to other societies that radically changed (for the worse) and our own errors: slavery, jim crow, internment of Japanese Americans, and failure to honor our treaties with the indians. Too many today have no sense of the past and no idea of how quickly things can go wrong. Once they are screwed up, well, there is no guarantee you can unscrew them.

        Somewhere in the first Bush Administration, I stopped referring to myself as a republican and started referencing conservative only. Problem is, people don’t make that distinction. They should. It was the Goldwater/Buckley/Reagan philosophy which brought me on board to begin with, not the “republican” philosophy. They are quite different. Conservative principals have won out in the Republican party many times, but as previously stated, liberal republicans(and democrats)are like “B” vampire Movies in the’40’s and ’50’s. No matter how deep you drive the stake into their hearts, they are always back for the sequel and you have to do it all over again.

        I find it interesting that polls show that the people turned away from the Republicans because they broke with their promises of smaller, better, cheaper government and yet Arlen Spector types tell us we have to continue to follow that “liberal” course to win. This is where I wonder if I am living in OZ, Wonderland or have just become schizoid.

  33. Kristian,

    I can understand your point, but it doesn’t explain the big fuss. Why not just do it quietly, and let others make their own decisions? Me, I let me daughter read the books. Though I didn’t read them myself, I did discuss it with her on several occassions. She was about 13 at the time. She knew at that age it wasn’t real, and that it was just a story and not to be taken seriously. Her cousins were forbidden from reading the books, and her father’s side of the family was horrified that she was permitted to read the series. Of course, my name was “mudd”. The way I see it, my daughter is going to be exposed to evil, and all kinds of choices throughout her life. She needs to learn about it and learn not to be seduced by it. She read the books and then pretty much forgot about them. She isn’t into the Goth crap, or any of that trash. She hasn’t been damaged by reading the stories and her faith in Jesus is strong. I’m not sure that applies to some of her cousins who were forbidden to read the stories. In fact, her cosuins have rebelled a bit as they’ve grown older. Not that my daughter is perfect, but she’s heading in the right direction.

  34. All;

    My initial post was directed at the current regime’s actions, which I believe is a controled effort to drive the people of this great country into a herd where they can be passified and controled. If that is Socialisum, Fascisum, or Communisum I don’t care; it is not freedom and the isum’s don’t work.

    I don’t believe that the majority of liberal minded individuals want our country to fall into a state of isum. I don’t believe the liberal wants the government to tell them how to run their lives or how to spend their money. I don’t even think that the majority of liberals believe everyone should make the same wage regardless of their individual talents.

    I do think they believe that everyone, regardless of intelligence or ability, should have all the basic essentials to live comfortably (Health Care, Housing, Education, etc, etc). I think they also believe that the more you earn the more you should pay. Basically I think the majority believe the wealth (Wealth in this case encompasses all the essentials reqquired to live a moderatly average life) should be distributed relatively even throughout the public.

    The problem with this entire mindset is that it will eventually fail, and fail catistrophically. It doesn’t have a solid foundation to build on and once a foundation crumbles your only recourse is to clear the land and start over.

    It also seems that conservatives and liberals are always disagreeing with the subject of distribution and how each party sees fit on controling that distribution. Because when you drill right down to it the argument is focused around how the government spends our tax dollars.

    Maybe we are arguing the wrong principles. Let me ask these questions.

    1)Is the Constitutions a sound and logical document for guiding a country?

    2)Is faith in a spiritual being important for defining moral and ethical rules of government?

    3)As a freeman or woman should you be able to pursue happiness as you see it so long as it does not violate those guidelines laid out in the first two questions?

    4)Do you believe that America is a great and wonderful place to live, and provides more opportunity for freedom than other countries in the world?

    5)Should America have and maintain a strong Military chartered with ensuring it’s population is safe to live free and ensure liberty?

    6)Should those officials elected into office be done so by the citizens of America and be accountable to the same?

    7)Do you believe that all peoples having residence in America should be treated with equal fairness, despite their individual beliefs?

    8)Do you believe that America should welcome the “huddled masses” provided they enter legally?

    9)Do you believe that we should have some sort of government aid system to assist those who are struggling regardless of the nature of that struggle?

    10)Do you believe that on the whole the government (local, state and federal) has lost touch with the majority and needs to be re-grounded?

    I wonder if for the most part we all will answer yes to these questions are we as a whole really on seperate sides of the table?

    Common Man

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Common – the answers a left leaning moderate:

      1)Is the Constitutions a sound and logical document for guiding a country? – Yes – as a ‘guide’

      2)Is faith in a spiritual being important for defining moral and ethical rules of government? – No, but it has some ancillary value therein

      3)As a freeman or woman should you be able to pursue happiness as you see it so long as it does not violate those guidelines laid out in the first two questions? – No – see #2

      4)Do you believe that America is a great and wonderful place to live, and provides more opportunity for freedom than other countries in the world? – Yes to part one, maybe to part two

      5)Should America have and maintain a strong Military chartered with ensuring it’s population is safe to live free and ensure liberty? – If strong = effective then yes

      6)Should those officials elected into office be done so by the citizens of America and be accountable to the same? – Yes – 100%

      7)Do you believe that all peoples having residence in America should be treated with equal fairness, despite their individual beliefs? – Yes

      8)Do you believe that America should welcome the “huddled masses” provided they enter legally? – Yes

      9)Do you believe that we should have some sort of government aid system to assist those who are struggling regardless of the nature of that struggle? – Yes – in a limited fashion

      10)Do you believe that on the whole the government (local, state and federal) has lost touch with the majority and needs to be re-grounded? The majority doesn’t vote so my answer is no

  35. Response to SK. Trynosky Sr. #31,

    My mom has similar feelings about Peru as your dad does Russia. She came to the US as a teen and remembers the political climate of the time. Needless to say, is is very upset about what she sees happening in the US now. As for my dad, he was six years old when the family finally made to American shores. There’s an interesting family story that I didn’t know of until about ten years ago. My grandfather went to New York City and worked as a chef until he could afford to bring the family over. When my grandmother, my dad, his younger brother and sister went to the port, they were not allowed to board the ship because their immigration paperwork was not in order. So they turned around and went back home. Sometime later they found out the ship they were supposed to have boarded went down in a storm killing everyone on board! Its a good thing my dad’s family decided to obey US immigration law, otherwise non of the current generation would have been born!

  36. Ray Hawkins says:

    Common – partially moved down from above since no response seemed forthcoming:

    Your statement:
    “Let as many illegal aliens over the boarder, give them Social Security benefits, provide them jobs…..”

    I thought the issue here (and actually from 2006) was with respect to granting formerly illegal aliens access to benefits they may have paid in as illegal aliens? (CIRA of 2006 and Senator Ensign’s amendment). Can you point me to the legislation or law that you drew this conclusion from? I am fairly certain there was not subsequent legislation that changed this.


    “Monitor and Control the Internet to minimize or eliminate open forums that oppose the current regime – The Cyber Security Act of 2009”

    This is not a true statement – the Act has not been passed and there has been significant debate this week from industry to have the more misguided portions of the bill removed.

    “Downplay the voice of the conservative American that believes in God, Country, Family, Truth, Liberty, and the right to self preservation – Call them Rednecks, hayseeds, Racists and stupid and have the Media broadcast news that reflects the same.”

    I don’t agree that the voice is being downplayed. If I believe O’Reilly then he is smoking Olbermann and Maddow. This just strikes me as the bully not being happy with the radio sandbox and wanting the newspaper and TV sandboxes as well. The Internet is still up for grabs last I checked.

    “Pass laws in the House and Senate that are Unconstitutional – The Stimulus Bill, R-45, Bonus Taxes in excess of 80%, etc, etc.”

    Are the laws not considered legal if they are passed by Congress and signed by your President Obama? They are only un-constitutional if they are challenged and ruled as such. (kind of like torture right?)

    “Promise the citizens a better life and promote a butterfly and blue skies lifestyle.”

    False – many of his speeches and rhetoric have called out numerous times the fact that there will be pain and sacrifice and hard work ahead. Some or all of it you or I may not agree with, but your statement is false.

    “Control the Supreme Court – Now that Barry gets to appoint a new Supreme Court Justice the Court is sure to become predominately liberal. This will certainly influence and promote new liberal laws that will support the regimes endeavor.”

    Wrong – history has shown us many times that what may have been perceived as a jurist bent to one philosophy is not always held as true.

    I could go on, but my point is here. You’re full welcome to have this as your mantra, but rare will I or someone like me give great pause to reflect on half-truths and unsupported beliefs. I do give you credit for putting it out there – you just didn’t do a very good job of providing clean and well supported statements.

    • Ray;

      I am sorry that I took time to respond, but I have a job, a company, a family and people who expect me to manage my time accordingly. If I had several million dollars in the bank I would spend more time writing and responding, but alas….

      My initial posting was and is my opinion supported by my own observations. My conclusions were based upon the actions of those in government and my peception of the outcomes.

      As an example: If you were my neighbour and one day you started lining our adjoining property line with numerous weapons, all directed at my house, I might conclude that you were going to initiate some kind of attack against me. If I chose to question you and ask you your intentions you may or may not tell me the truth. Regardless of the answer I am still going to be concerned. In turn I am going to be forced to react in some way.

      My point here is that Barry and his miniuns are executing plans that are in direct opposition to my views as well as a number of other people. And those actions, if left unchecked will disrupt our society, economy, security and liberties.

      So, just like you lining our property line with weapons directed at my home I am forced to react. In this circumstance I may decide to line my side of the property line with weapons as well, or I may chose to call the police, but I am not going to waste time trying to figure out what your exact intentions are. It may be prudent to try and figure out why you are lining the property line with weapons so that I could persuade you to do otherwise, but that effort may result in my ultimate dimise.

      Given the fact that my recourse with the governments actions are limited I decided I would look at the evidence and take action as a result of my beliefs.

      In response to your specific comments:

      Illegal’s are and have been since Bush’s regime coming in by the thousands, and for the most part pretty much left unchecked. We have not built the wall. We have reduced the number of “boots on the ground”. We have procecuted Border Agents for executing their assigned responsibilities. We do provide wealfare benefits to illegals. Both regimes have promoted ways to legalize the illegals despite the fact that they are in this country illegally. We do provide the illegals a free ecucation and medical benefits. And those that can produce a convincing enough set of papers (Birth Certificate, SS card, etc.) do pay into and recieve SS benefits.

      The questions here is WHY? I have concluded that both parties believe that the more destitute and forlorn people they can bring into their respected parties the better chance they have of winning the vote. Let’s face it, neither party feels that they are persuading enough of the “real” citizens of America that they have the right view, because if they did they wouldn’t feel the need to recruit new ones from other countries.

      Cyber Security Act of 2009 – In principle this one is just an expansion of the Patriot Act. It was developed to give the government legal right to snoop on whom ever and when ever they chose via the Internet. It is good that some representatives are fighting it’s legitimacy, but that does not diminish the fact that it was written, sponsored and proposed as a bill to the house. It is Unconstitutional! If you propose Acts/Bills that are Unconstitutional then you are not a believer in the Constitution. BTW: I believe that it and the “Fairness Doctine” are efforts to monitor and control what is being communicated by the American public. That is Unconstitutional!

      Downplay the voice – Those that executed their first ammendment rights by organizing and conducting “Tea Parties” were in fact belittled and chastised by the mainsteam media, the current regime and it’s supporters. This was an attempt to squash the voice of a concerned public so that those in the pocket of the current regime would dismiss it as radical action. Also, when you add up the number of liberal based media and compare it to conservative based media you can only conclude it is terribly one sided. Initiating and promoting the “Fairness Doctrine” is an act to further that tilted platform, and elliminate the catalysts for conservative view points. The liberal party had been pushing this concept for many years, they now have a regime powerfull enough to help realize it.

      Un-Constitutional Laws. The Stimulus Bill, R-45, Cyber Security Act or 2009, The Fairness Doctrine, emergency tax laws and many more are absolutely Un-Constitutional. Efforts of this nature are in direct violation to the Constitution and therefore a violation of Constitutional Law. Just becasue a judge or court or elected official succeeds in passing an act or law does not make it Constitutional. Getting it done DOES support my theory that this regime is attempting to redirect this country towards a unconstitutional rule. The efforts to bring International Law into play proves that. There are no doctrines or authorities superior to the Constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!! The effort to redirect or superseed a founding document IS in my eyes treason.

      Blue Sky’s – Barry started his campaign, and continues to do so, promise a better America dedicated to the distribution of prosperity for all. The fact that he has spoken of difficult times, and needed adjustments does not in any way dismiss the fact that he is promoting economic equality to all. The sheep in this contry just bought, and to some degree are still buying, the idea that economic equality will be realized. His Robin Hood approach will not work, it never has any where in the world long term.

      Supreme Court – My entire argument here is based upon the history of appointees regardless of the party in power. Each and every President has to some degree appointed, or attempted to appoint judges that reflect his overall doctrine. Barry is no different. Just because we have had relative balance in the Supreme Court does not dismiss the fact that it is just another cog in the wheel. I will admit that some of the courts recent rulings have suprised me. Therefore this may be a moot point, but time will tell. If Jenny is appointed…God help us!!!!

      And let me add a couple of my points that you didn’t argue:

      Trash the Constitution – I have addressed this to a great degree iin my comments above, but it is critical. If you can manage to over ride the legitimacy of the Costitution and set a precident, then you greatly reduce the opositions grounds for retaliation. Take a look at the numerous times individual courts have set precidents, and the results thereof.

      Control the legislative branches – He has the majority rule in Congress by party alliances. He has control of the Senate by party alliances. He controls the treasury. Arlene Spector did not get the Democratic support becasue he promised to continue his mode of operation, otherwise they would not have agreed to ensure he is re-elected. Promises were made and he will only retain his seat as long as he does what is expected of him.

      Ecological disastor – Global Warming or Climate Change or what ever you want to call it is such a farse that it is almost comical. I am a hunter, fisherman and outdoorsman of some 40 years and I am far more versed on the climate than Al Gore could ever hope to be. Yes there are some changes to our climate, but they are no more drastic than they have been for the last several hundred years. Polar bears are not endangered, as a matter of fact they are at an all time high. There are statistics to prove it. As a matter of fact the majority of animals residing in the US and Canada are all higher now than they have been for years. With the exception of Russia the US populates less ground per-capita than any other country on earth. Some 68% of this country is un-populated. I could go on and on about this and how our contributions to the ecology, both bad and good, are irrelevant on a global scale, but that is a subject for another posting. The fact of the matter is the liberals are using it to scare the public into believing they must change from fossil fuels, recycle everything, drive more efficent cars, stop drilling, etc, etc, etc. It’s bullshit. There is a program on, I believe, the History Channel that predicts how the world will react when there is no longer any people left living. It’s based upon scientific evidence and to some degree speculation, but it denonstraits the power and influence of Mother Nature.

      In closing let me say that although I have no idea what goes on in Barry’s brain and what his true actions are, I can come to some conclusions based upon his actions. And I am a man that no longer judges people by the tongue in their mouth, only by the tongue in their shoes. His shoes are pointing us toward something other than Capitalisum, individual liberty, freedom and a government fearfull of the people. Why is irrelavant, but the obvious results are.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Well articulated CM – but you are still confusing truth with belief. Your beliefs aren’t true simply because you say they are. You can believe your beliefs are true when in fact they are not – but hey – its a blog and you can whatever the hell you want to right?

        • Well you really can’t argue my key point…they want power and to posses it! If the desire for power is to wreck the country by pushing it to an isum, then my assumptions are correct. If the desire for power is just that and the result is a wrecked country shifted to an isum, then again I am correct

          Just thought I would use a little of what I have learned from the last few postings

  37. Excellent post Comman Man. You nailed it. Just this morning I heard Rush mention something about a NY Times article buried in the back section, refering to ‘preventive retention’ or something to that effect. I need to look into it. Have you heard anything about it? Supposedly, the One had an off the record meeting with some human rights activists with this as the subject matter. I believe this new program is deisgned for American political opponents, and not terrorists and muslims….

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Cyndi – I just read the full article – it is part of the standard NYT National section – not ‘buried in the back pages’.

      The article says nothing about preventive detention for political opponents – zilch – zero. Either you or Rush made that one up (probably greasy-pawed pill popper Rush). The crux of the issue is that we detain individuals outside a recognized field of combat and have no process by which to legally deal with them – folks deemed a ‘threat to National Security’ that we cannot, for NS reasons try them in a Court of Law. I’d be interested in hearing what others think we should do with them (and fwiw, isn’t preventive detention already used in the US – I thought for people convicted of sex crimes that have served their time but still deemed a threat).

  38. Ray,

    Stop insulting a radio talk show host. Surely you can do better than that. Buried or not, whatever. I also mentioned that I planned to look into it MYSElF. And I have. I didn’t look at the newspaper itself. I googled the article an read it. I wouldn’t be surprised if we never hear about it again until political opponents start to disappear ala Argentina. I don’t need Rush or anyone to tell me what to think. I still believe ‘preventive detention’ will come in handy for Obama later on.

    As for the preventive detention Obama is pondering, I believe it is very subject to abuse. I don’t trust Obama. I won’t waste time explaining it again because his believers will believe him and love him no matter what he does. So, since the US government, now and in the past has been guilty of abusing people and disregarding their opinions, why should I believe it won’t happen in the future when it is politically expedient to do so? All I see is Obama and his lackeys grabbing as much power as they can. They will probably use it for something. Now you and the rest of Obama’s follwers likely believe it is for the good of America, and that’s fine. You have free speech. Others of us are not so convinced. Only time will tell what Obama is really up to.

  39. Ray Hawkins says:

    Cyndi – sorry – I like Lush Eightball as much as the next liberal. We all love him as a matter of fact. Batshit crazy people like Lush, Mann Coulter and the rest make us liberals look like the middle ~ people like me need to comedic crazy-as-ape-shit humor they give us. And seriously – preventive detention to lock up people like you? Wow.

    • If it hadn’t happened before in this country, think WW 1, WW 2, Cold War (Hollywood 10) then I guess I’d think Cyndi might be going overboard. But, since it has, I have to concede the point to her. It’s one of those facts that you talk about and not one of those beliefs.

      As previously pointed out, Rush is right 80% of the time. The libs are usually so funny that you do not have to impute anything to them. Like “Lyin” Joe Biden, they are right out in the open.

  40. Ray,

    What’s with the name calling? Remember how I wound you up a couple of weeks ago? Do you remember how you defended yourself? How does your last post validate your claim? I’d have another go around with you, but I’m heading out tomorrow on a mini vaction in Micronesia and will have better things to do over the weekend.

    SK. Trynosky Sr thanks for the back up.


    • Ray Hawkins says:

      He is simply one of the worst human beings to ever walk the planet – I’m having a little fun with it.

      fwiw I am cringing as I listen to Rachel Maddow criticize President Obama – weird, very weird.

      Enjoy your time wherever you’re headed.

%d bloggers like this: